Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Jack Flash1
MOST VALUABLE POSTER
Global user
Registered: 11-2007
Posts: 788
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
It was just a fluke
Agreed. After what we've had...I'm cool with a cheap 40 ugly saves than an expensive 45 pretty saves. I know, I know...those ugly saves turn into blown saves if he doesn't correct what he's doing wrong...but until we can get a very good closer for cheap outta our system...I'll take the sloppy guy who's getting it done ugly.
|
|
6/29/2009, 4:58 pm
|
|
sayheykid1
HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user
Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 2099
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: It was just a fluke
quote:
Freshbreaker wrote:
quote:
sayheykid1 wrote:
quote:
Freshbreaker wrote:
quote:
sayheykid1 wrote:
quote:
Freshbreaker wrote:
quote:
Jack Flash1 wrote:
Fresh - you make my point. Maybe we can just cut Wilson...think Benitez wants another $30M? Ok, I know you aren't saying you want that...but to say Wilson sucks (and is paid $400k), to me...those people lose credibility in their opinions...again, to me. Then again, if his WHIP goes down and he makes 5 all star games in a row & wins an MVP...folks here will then say he's ok...maybe.
You're right it's unfair to say Wilson sucks. But I hate him because he's painful to watch pitch. And frankly, I think there are probably other guys who can perform just as well, but that's a separate point.
Who can perform "as well" and why would the Giants want to replace Wilson with one of them?
Who: Merkin, Affeldt
Why: Bring in a hitter by trading Wilson.
I am not sold on Affeldt, take a look at his numbers over 8 seasons and Valdez has 40 career innings of ehhhhhh.
Who would Wilson fetch?
Well, that would take some roster scouring and a few trips to Cots and baseball Reference, but I would think you could take a top 7 prospect and Wilson and put together an attractive package.
But what are you looking for? A half year rental? A mediocre vet on the downside of his career? Or do you think Wilson, who in your estimation is no better than Valdez or Affeldt could garner a bat that is a big upgrade and can produce beyond next year?
---
I met with Napper Tandy
And I shook him by the hand
He said 'Hold me up for Chrissake for I can hardly stand'
|
|
6/29/2009, 5:46 pm
|
|
Pandoval
MOST VALUABLE POSTER
Global user
Registered: 05-2009
Posts: 914
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: It was just a fluke
NY sports personality & die-hard Giants fan Chris Russo on Wilson's blown save & his whole 'act' in general.
http://rapidshare.com/files/250193272/SiriusXM_-_Mad_Dog_Unleashed_-_06-29-09.mp3
|
|
6/29/2009, 9:19 pm
|
|
Nimbus Rodus
HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user
Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1666
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: It was just a fluke
quote:
MarcoPolo666 wrote:
"Saves" (in a vacuum, as the only stat used for evaluation) is a horrible way to evaluate/rank closers. Just as W-L is for starting pitchers.
If we are going to use a single stat to evaluate closers, lets use "blown saves". Wilson has 4 blown saves, tied for 5th in the national league. Who has more than Wilson?
Joel Hanrahan (5), ERA of 7.71.
Aaron Heilman (5)
Cory Wade (6,) ERA of 5.88
Brad Lidge (7), ERA of 7.57.
Of those four pitchers, only Lidge is actually a closer for his team - the others are simply relief pitchers.
So, using blown saves as the single stat, Wilson is actually the 2nd worst closer in the NL. I don't think he's that bad, actually, but that's the risk you take when you look at one stat to evaluate a pitcher (like "20 saves, tied for 2nd in the NL"). Wilson is alos NOT the same class of pitcher that Francisco Rodriguez is (he's the other guy in the NL with 20 saves).
Just throwing this out there fwiw....I don't necessarily think that ranking by "blown saves" is all that great a stat as well. Closer A could have five blown saves and Closer B could have four blown saves.....who is the better closer? You would think Closer B...but what if Closer A had 40 saves and Closer B had only ten. Does this change things? Saves percentage might be a better way to judge overall Closer performance, but I believe that you still need to take into account ERA, number of save opportunities and their stress also factor in.
I also stress when I watch Wilson, and wonder why the hell no one is teaching him a freakin' offspeed pitch?
|
|
6/30/2009, 6:31 am
|
|
irishbum
HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user
Registered: 10-2006
Posts: 1452
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: It was just a fluke
oh my f-ing god I agree with marco about Wilson
|
|
6/30/2009, 9:11 am
|
|
MarcoPolo666
HALL OF FAME POSTER
Global user
Registered: 07-2007
Posts: 4732
|
|
Reply | Quote
|
|
Re: It was just a fluke
quote:
Nimbus Rodus wrote:
Just throwing this out there fwiw....I don't necessarily think that ranking by "blown saves" is all that great a stat as well. Closer A could have five blown saves and Closer B could have four blown saves.....who is the better closer? You would think Closer B...but what if Closer A had 40 saves and Closer B had only ten. Does this change things? Saves percentage might be a better way to judge overall Closer performance, but I believe that you still need to take into account ERA, number of save opportunities and their stress also factor in.
Sorry - I wasn't really proposing to use blown saves as a great way to rank closers. I was showing how ridiculous ranking closers by # of saves is (either successful or blown). A closer who comes in 50 times with a one run lead and blows 5 of them is most likely better than a closer who comes in 50 times with a 3 run lead, hasn't blown a save, but has an era of 18 because he *always* gives up 2 runs.
A "save" is pretty dependent on the team as a whole : if the team never has a lead in the 9th, there are no save chances. If the team scores 3 more runs than the other team, it's an easier "save" than if they only score 1 more. Heck, it's not even just offense, it depends on how good the previous pitchers were (either bad, so you're losing, or so good you have a 10-0 lead). "Saves" is a horrible way to rank a closer, as is "blown saves".
Last edited by MarcoPolo666, 6/30/2009, 10:52 am
|
|
6/30/2009, 10:50 am
|
|
Quick Reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5
Link to us
- Blogs
- Hall of Honour
- Chat
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 11/30/2009, 12:54 am
|
|
|
